STP enough ?

[eblok2012]

I have to build up a redundant VMWARE System.

I have a Core Switch (5400ZL )  and 2 Devices  1910-48Port Gig Switches for the VMWARE Hosts.

I want to interconnect the 1910 Switches with a 2 Port Trunk on every Switch to make a fast connection between the Switches .

I want to connect every of the 1910 Switches with one Gigabit Port to the 5400 Core Switch to get full redundancy if one of the Host-Switches is faulty .

What  is the last Job to avoid loops on this construction ?

Is it correct that  that i have only to activate the STP Protocoll on every Switch to avoid loops ?? ,

or is there a way that i can the manage the trunk between the 1910 Switches to transport only traffic between these Switches

Regards 

Christian

P.S. this thread has been moved from Switches, Hubs, Modems (Legacy ITRC forum) to Web and Unmanaged - Hp Forum Moderator

[Pourl]

Hi,

u have to be sure that every switch use the same protocol. If u only use 3 Switches take rstp.

In the CLI:

conf t

spanning-tree

spanning-tree force-version rstp-operation

and if you want to be ensure that the 5400 is root typ this:

spanning-tree priority 0

thats it!

[eblok2012]

Hello Pourl,

the network is a wide area of nearly 50 Switches , all HP Products with different types from 6600 to 2920

and 3 Core Switches ..

But the only point where I need to connect Switches together and every switch single to one core switch

is the VMWARE System ...

Shuould I use RSTP also in this scenario ?

Could you explain the difference from "classic" STP to this RSTP what you prefer ?

[Pourl]

RSTP is compatible to STP but is significant faster, there is no need for stp.

If this is the only loop constellation u can use RSTP.

BTW. u should configure each Port with a Server as follow:

spanning-tree <port-range> admin-edge-port

So no Switch will be expected and latency decreases. any spanning tree protocol is disabled for these ports. but never plug a switch to these ports, wheater u are sure that u dont build a loop.